Cavs/Detroit

[bgrep14]

Cavs: Garland and Niang

Detroit: Cunningham, Wiseman, and Fournier

Cavs: get more size next to Mitchell

Detroit: get a former all star locked in long term

[Godaddycurse]

a) wiseman is not under contract
b) Fournier shouldn't be under contract
c) if Detroit is trading Cade it's to rebuild all over and not for someone on a max contract

[HornetJail]

I would personally happily take Garland over Cade but Detroit's definitely not going to see it that way.

[jbk1234]

I just don't think that Altman is going to trade Garland this summer.

[GQ Hot Dog]

I just don't think that Altman is going to trade Garland this summer.

If DoMitch gets extended, will Garland be able to return to 2021-22 and 2022-23 form playing next to him? If not, why keep him when he can't showcase his full potential and isn't happy next to DoMitch?

This is the best time to trade him because many teams have need of a talented lead guard entering his prime. Let a bidding war start and get the best return possible for a guy that has perennial All-Star potential. After playing another year with Cleveland, he might not be viewed that way so much.

[jbk1234]

I just don't think that Altman is going to trade Garland this summer.

If DoMitch gets extended, will Garland be able to return to 2021-22 and 2022-23 form playing next to him? If not, why keep him when he can't showcase his full potential and isn't happy next to DoMitch?

This is the best time to trade him because many teams have need of a talented lead guard entering his prime. Let a bidding war start and get the best return possible for a guy that has perennial All-Star potential. After playing another year with Cleveland, he might not be viewed that way so much.

Garland played next to Mitchell in 2022-23, and that should be the floor, not the roof under a new coach. That's what most people aren't getting

[wemby]

Not a super fan of Cade, but his value is higher than Garland's. Pistons should pass, easily.

[GQ Hot Dog]

I just don't think that Altman is going to trade Garland this summer.

If DoMitch gets extended, will Garland be able to return to 2021-22 and 2022-23 form playing next to him? If not, why keep him when he can't showcase his full potential and isn't happy next to DoMitch?

This is the best time to trade him because many teams have need of a talented lead guard entering his prime. Let a bidding war start and get the best return possible for a guy that has perennial All-Star potential. After playing another year with Cleveland, he might not be viewed that way so much.

Garland played next to Mitchell in 2022-23, and that should be the floor, not the roof under a new coach. That's what most people aren't getting

We(I) know what Garland is capable of. If you trade him now, I think you can get a return that makes the team better next year than keeping Garland would. And I'm not talking about Miles Bridges.

If Garland wants to leave, let him and his agent go drum up interest, then create a bidding war and if it doesn't yield a return that moves the Cavs forward right away, don't trade him. Garland has no real leverage here so let a team get desperate and blow the Cavs FO away with a godfather offer.

If a Gobert to the TWolves level offer was made, should Altman turn it down?

[Laimbeer]

I would personally happily take Garland over Cade but Detroit's definitely not going to see it that way.

Detroit should see it that way. By this point, it's apparent that Cade will not be a superstar. The hope is he will become as good as Garland.

[jayjaysee]

I don’t think the value difference between Cade and Garland is really that big. Cade going to get paid next year based off of potential, at least Garland’s floor impacts games.

Whether Detroit wants a high lottery pick and some other value (involving Houston/Charlotte) or whether they want a volume pick package (involving NOP) or if they want to keep Garland, tank anyways next year and picture Duren/Thompson/Bailey/Garland with either Matas or Holland in 2025?

Cleveland could add some minor value if needed, but I actually like the idea for them. Take the risk

[Whole Truth]

If DoMitch gets extended, will Garland be able to return to 2021-22 and 2022-23 form playing next to him? If not, why keep him when he can't showcase his full potential and isn't happy next to DoMitch?

This is the best time to trade him because many teams have need of a talented lead guard entering his prime. Let a bidding war start and get the best return possible for a guy that has perennial All-Star potential. After playing another year with Cleveland, he might not be viewed that way so much.

Garland played next to Mitchell in 2022-23, and that should be the floor, not the roof under a new coach. That's what most people aren't getting

We(I) know what Garland is capable of. If you trade him now, I think you can get a return that makes the team better next year than keeping Garland would. And I'm not talking about Miles Bridges.

If Garland wants to leave, let him and his agent go drum up interest, then create a bidding war and if it doesn't yield a return that moves the Cavs forward right away, don't trade him. Garland has no real leverage here so let a team get desperate and blow the Cavs FO away with a godfather offer.

If a Gobert to the TWolves level offer was made, should Altman turn it down?

I don't believe in lopsided trades. A trade where both parties get what they want make for great trade partners based in trust.

Fleece teams enough, you will get a reputation not to be dealt with.

[Kalamazoo317]

I don’t think the value difference between Cade and Garland is really that big. Cade going to get paid next year based off of potential, at least Garland’s floor impacts games.

Whether Detroit wants a high lottery pick and some other value (involving Houston/Charlotte) or whether they want a volume pick package (involving NOP) or if they want to keep Garland, tank anyways next year and picture Duren/Thompson/Bailey/Garland with either Matas or Holland in 2025?

Cleveland could add some minor value if needed, but I actually like the idea for them. Take the risk

I agree that Cade/Garland is fairly even value. Just doesn’t make any sense for the Pistons to move Cade for even value. What’s the point for us?

[guldakot]

I would personally happily take Garland over Cade but Detroit's definitely not going to see it that way.

Detroit should see it that way. By this point, it's apparent that Cade will not be a superstar. The hope is he will become as good as Garland.

There is literally nothing apparent about Cades ceiling yet, anyone who makes definitive statements this early into a career especially with the start his career has had concerning coaching, team construction and injuries, never intended to judge him fairly.

Take player year out of the equation and just compare games played, and Cade currently compares favorably with SGA at this point in his career. Slightly worse shooting better R and A numbers. Please remember that Cade had to play significant minutes last year along side LITERALLY 2 of the worst players in the NBA in Hayes and Livers, and not just bad for last season but historically bad. Livers had a bottom 10 season in NBA history for his output vs usage. Detroit last year had 30 different starting lineups, and the only halfway decent vet we had (Bogie) missed a large chunk of the season with injuries.

Cade was getting triple team blitzed every damn game it was ugly.

Im not saying Cade is SGA, but the kid has not been given a fair shake yet.
This year will be his judgement year.

[guldakot]

I don’t think the value difference between Cade and Garland is really that big. Cade going to get paid next year based off of potential, at least Garland’s floor impacts games.

Whether Detroit wants a high lottery pick and some other value (involving Houston/Charlotte) or whether they want a volume pick package (involving NOP) or if they want to keep Garland, tank anyways next year and picture Duren/Thompson/Bailey/Garland with either Matas or Holland in 2025?

Cleveland could add some minor value if needed, but I actually like the idea for them. Take the risk

I agree that Cade/Garland is fairly even value. Just doesn’t make any sense for the Pistons to move Cade for even value. What’s the point for us?

Its not even value imo, Garland is a dime a dozen player, there is someone of his caliber in almost every draft. There's a reason why he has been mentioned in trades for the last 2 years. Good scorer, decent playmaker, bad D, bad size. Garland is nice but he's a tier2/3 player imo.

Cade still has a much higher possible ceiling, trading him now especially for a player like Garland would be just plain stupid.

[zeebneeb]

If Trajon is successful, and puts real NBA players around Cade this year, this is just one of many threads people will look back on and laugh.

This isn't even in the same universe of value needed for Cade.

[GQ Hot Dog]

Garland played next to Mitchell in 2022-23, and that should be the floor, not the roof under a new coach. That's what most people aren't getting

We(I) know what Garland is capable of. If you trade him now, I think you can get a return that makes the team better next year than keeping Garland would. And I'm not talking about Miles Bridges.

If Garland wants to leave, let him and his agent go drum up interest, then create a bidding war and if it doesn't yield a return that moves the Cavs forward right away, don't trade him. Garland has no real leverage here so let a team get desperate and blow the Cavs FO away with a godfather offer.

If a Gobert to the TWolves level offer was made, should Altman turn it down?

I don't believe in lopsided trades. A trade where both parties get what they want make for great trade partners based in trust.

Fleece teams enough, you will get a reputation not to be dealt with.

I'm not suggesting a fleecing. I'm suggesting if dealing Garland makes the team better now, and I think there are trades out there that would, the FO should do it.

I don't think any trade involving Garland that makes Cleveland better now would have to be a fleece job in their favor.

[mcfly1204]

I don’t think the value difference between Cade and Garland is really that big. Cade going to get paid next year based off of potential, at least Garland’s floor impacts games.

Whether Detroit wants a high lottery pick and some other value (involving Houston/Charlotte) or whether they want a volume pick package (involving NOP) or if they want to keep Garland, tank anyways next year and picture Duren/Thompson/Bailey/Garland with either Matas or Holland in 2025?

Cleveland could add some minor value if needed, but I actually like the idea for them. Take the risk

I agree that Cade/Garland is fairly even value. Just doesn’t make any sense for the Pistons to move Cade for even value. What’s the point for us?

Its not even value imo, Cunningham is a dime a dozen player, there is someone of his caliber in almost every draft. There's a reason why he has been mentioned in trades for the last 2 years. Good scorer, decent playmaker, bad D, bad shooting efficiency. Cunningham is nice but he's a tier2/3 player imo.

Garland still has a much higher possible ceiling, trading him now especially for a player like Cunningham would be just plain stupid.

[jayjaysee]

:lol:

If Trajon is successful, and puts real NBA players around Cade this year, this is just one of many threads people will look back on and laugh.

This isn't even in the same universe of value needed for Cade.

No one looks at Cleveland’s Mitchell trade and compares this Lauri to that Lauri..

Hindsight is fun, but no one is trading for Cade because he is a star and impacts wins. The hope/belief that he becomes one is worth considerably less.

[DetroitDon15]

I’m not trading Cade for Garland. Bad deal cause Detroit takes on 20 mill this offseason while not improving the roster. Cade is the one thing that Weaver got right. Detroit needs to move Duren, Ivey and Thompson. There’s plenty of changes Detroit can make but trading Cade shouldnt(can’t be one) unless they do a complete tear down. If they complete tear down, moving Cade to San Antonio for their picks is really the only option (possibly). I’m still not sure that I want to go that way.